Senators did not discuss the hot topic of controversial pay rises for senior politicians yesterday, after Government made the surprise move of delaying the debate for a week.

No reason was given in the Senate for the motion getting carried over.

But Government Senate Leader Larry Mussenden, speaking after yesterday morning?s session, said the adjournment would allow extra time for more discussion before a decision is made by the Upper House.

The Attorney General said he was now looking forward to the pay rise discussion taking place next Wednesday. He predicted there would be ?lively debate? on what he described as a ?significant piece of legislation?.

Some Senators said they believed the delay was because Government was not certain of victory in the Upper House yesterday ? as mystery continued to surround how the three Independent members would vote on the draft resolution.

If approved, a near 80 percent percent rise ? from $111,714 to $200,000 ? would go to Premier Alex Scott. Senators, however, will only see their $26,287 annual salary increase with inflation.

Independent Senators have stayed tight-lipped on their position so far. But if they team up with the Opposition they could defeat the motion six votes to five ? and hand Government a bloody nose on the controversial issue.

It is understood that the Senate would ultimately not be able to reverse the decision of MPs. And even if the resolution was rejected, it would only be delayed around six months before the resolution returned to the Senate to become law. It is understood the resolution could not be blocked a second time by the Upper House.

Senate President Alf Oughton, speaking after a private meeting with Mr. Mussenden at the close of yesterday?s session, said he was surprised by the delay.

He said he was not entirely sure of the reason behind it, but added: ?I think they (Government) thought it might be defeated.?

He refused to confirm how he would vote and did not know how the two other Independent Senators, Carol Ann Bassett and Walwyn Hughes, were going to vote because the Independents do not ?caucus?.

Mr. Mussenden later said the Independents had not given him any indication about how they would vote.

He added the motion, enabling full-time Ministers to pick up $150,000, appeared to have attracted a lot of attention and discussion in the community ? as well as among Senators. Pressed on the postponement, he said Government had discretion to carry over items on the Senate agenda.

He said, at this stage, there had been no Government re-think on the pay rise issue, but there had been ?interesting views? put forward by non-Government Senators.

He denied this had amounted to pressure.

Meanwhile, the Senate Leader said that reported warnings from senior civil servants and Police officers over the impact politicians? pay rises might have on other public service salaries played no part in yesterday?s adjournment.

After the session, Senate Leader Kim Swan said the Opposition had been given no warning about the postponement. ?We were prepared to talk about it,? he said.

Confirming the UBP would oppose the move, he added: ?There?s great public disquiet about it.?

Senate President Mr. Oughton has previously said that according to the Ministers and Members of the Legislature (Salaries and Pensions) Act 1975, both the House of Assembly and the Senate have to agree for the resolution to be effective.

He pledged a meaningful discussion from the three Independent Senators, as they would not be split down party political lines.

Sen. Hughes, meanwhile, has said the media would have to come to the Senate debate to find out which way he would vote, while Sen. Bassett remained reticent. ?I do know but I am not going to tell you,? she told last week.

Former Clerk of the Legislature John Gilbert has said that he did not believe Independent Senators would reject the resolution.

He said: ?The elected Parliamentarians have decided by majority vote that they want this. If the Senate rejected it, the resolution would have to go back to the House of Assembly and then be brought back to Senate.?

In the House of Assembly, voting was split down party lines, with 16 Progressive Labour Party MPs voting for it and 13 United Bermuda Party MPs voting against the resolution.